Search (14 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Cordeiro, M.I.; Slavic, A.: Data models for knowledge organization tools : evolution and perspectives (2003) 0.01 
    0.01194619 = product of:
  0.02389238 = sum of:
    0.02389238 = product of:
      0.09556952 = sum of:
        0.09556952 = weight(_text_:authors in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09556952 = score(doc=2632,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 2632, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2632)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper focuses on the need for knowledge organization (KO) tools, such as library classifications, thesauri and subject heading systems, to be fully disclosed and available in the open network environment. The authors look at the place and value of traditional library knowledge organization tools in relation to the technical environment and expectations of the Semantic Web. Future requirements in this context are explored, stressing the need for KO systems to support semantic interoperability. In order to be fully shareable KO tools need to be reframed and reshaped in terms of conceptual and data models. The authors suggest that some useful approaches to this already exist in methodological and technical developments within the fields of ontology modelling and lexicographic and terminological data interchange.
  2. Kwasnik, B.H.; Rubin, V.L.: Stretching conceptual structures in classifications across languages and cultures (2003) 0.01 
    0.01194619 = product of:
  0.02389238 = sum of:
    0.02389238 = product of:
      0.09556952 = sum of:
        0.09556952 = weight(_text_:authors in 5517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09556952 = score(doc=5517,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 5517, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5517)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The authors describe the difficulties of translating classifications from a source language and culture to another language and culture. To demonstrate these problems, kinship terms and concepts from native speakers of fourteen languages were collected and analyzed to find differences between their terms and structures and those used in English. Using the representations of kinship terms in the Library of Congress Classification (LCC) and the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) as examples, the authors identified the source of possible lack of mapping between the domain of kinship in the fourteen languages studied and the LCC and DDC. Finally, some preliminary suggestions for how to make translated classifications more linguistically and culturally hospitable are offered.
  3. Olson, H.A.: Sameness and difference : a cultural foundation of classification (2001) 0.01 
    0.01162994 = product of:
  0.02325988 = sum of:
    0.02325988 = product of:
      0.04651976 = sum of:
        0.04651976 = weight(_text_:22 in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04651976 = score(doc=166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17176686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  4. Slavic, A.: On the nature and typology of documentary classifications and their use in a networked environment (2007) 0.01 
    0.009968519 = product of:
  0.019937038 = sum of:
    0.019937038 = product of:
      0.039874077 = sum of:
        0.039874077 = weight(_text_:22 in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039874077 = score(doc=780,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17176686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 780, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=780)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22.12.2007 17:22:31
  5. Slavic, A.; Cordeiro, M.I.: Core requirements for automation of analytico-synthetic classifications (2004) 0.01 
    0.008447232 = product of:
  0.016894463 = sum of:
    0.016894463 = product of:
      0.067577854 = sum of:
        0.067577854 = weight(_text_:authors in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.067577854 = score(doc=2651,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The paper analyses the importance of data presentation and modelling and its role in improving the management, use and exchange of analytico-synthetic classifications in automated systems. Inefficiencies, in this respect, hinder the automation of classification systems that offer the possibility of building compound index/search terms. The lack of machine readable data expressing the semantics and structure of a classification vocabulary has negative effects on information management and retrieval, thus restricting the potential of both automated systems and classifications themselves. The authors analysed the data representation structure of three general analytico-synthetic classification systems (BC2-Bliss Bibliographic Classification; BSO-Broad System of Ordering; UDC-Universal Decimal Classification) and put forward some core requirements for classification data representation
  6. Gnoli, C.: Naturalism vs pragmatism in knowledge organization (2004) 0.01 
    0.008447232 = product of:
  0.016894463 = sum of:
    0.016894463 = product of:
      0.067577854 = sum of:
        0.067577854 = weight(_text_:authors in 2663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.067577854 = score(doc=2663,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 2663, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2663)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Several authors remark that categories used in languages, including indexing ones, are affected by cultural biases, and do not reflect reality in an objective way. Hence knowledge organization would essentially be determined by pragmatic factors. However, human categories are connected with the structure of reality through biological bonds, and this allows for a naturalistic approach too. Naturalism has been adopted by Farradane in proposing relational categories, and by Dahlberg and the CRG in applying the theory of integrative levels to general classification schemes. The latter is especially relevant for possible developments in making the structure of schemes independent from disciplines, and in applying it to digital information retrieval.
  7. Kublik, A.; Clevette, V.; Ward, D.; Olson, H.A.: Adapting dominant classifications to particular contexts (2003) 0.01 
    0.008447232 = product of:
  0.016894463 = sum of:
    0.016894463 = product of:
      0.067577854 = sum of:
        0.067577854 = weight(_text_:authors in 5516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.067577854 = score(doc=5516,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 5516, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5516)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper addresses the process of adapting to a particular culture or context a classification that has grown out of western culture to become a global standard. The authors use a project that adapts DDC for use in a feminist/women's issues context to demonstrate an approach that works. The project is particularly useful as an interdisciplinary example. Discussion consists of four parts: (1) definition of the problem indicating the need for adaptation and efforts to date; (2) description of the methodology developed for creating an expansion; (3) description of the interface developed for actually doing the work, with its potential for a distributed group to work on it together (could even be internationally distributed); and (4) generalization of how the methodology could be used for particular contexts by country, ethnicity, perspective or other defining factors.
  8. Karamuftuoglu, M.: Need for a systemic theory of classification in information science (2007) 0.01 
    0.008447232 = product of:
  0.016894463 = sum of:
    0.016894463 = product of:
      0.067577854 = sum of:
        0.067577854 = weight(_text_:authors in 615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.067577854 = score(doc=615,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 615, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=615)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In the article, the author aims to clarify some of the issues surrounding the discussion regarding the usefulness of a substantive classification theory in information science (IS) by means of a broad perspective. By utilizing a concrete example from the High Accuracy Retrieval from Documents (HARD) track of a Text REtrieval Conference (TREC), the author suggests that the bag of words approach to information retrieval (IR) and techniques such as relevance feedback have significant limitations in expressing and resolving complex user information needs. He argues that a comprehensive analysis of information needs involves explicating often-implicit assumptions made by the authors of scholarly documents, as well as everyday texts such as news articles. He also argues that progress in IS can be furthered by developing general theories that are applicable to multiple domains. The concrete example of application of the domain-analytic approach to subject analysis in IS to the aesthetic evaluation of works of information arts is used to support this argument.
  9. Beghtol, C.: Naïve classification systems and the global information society (2004) 0.01 
    0.0083071 = product of:
  0.0166142 = sum of:
    0.0166142 = product of:
      0.0332284 = sum of:
        0.0332284 = weight(_text_:22 in 3483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0332284 = score(doc=3483,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17176686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3483, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3483)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Pages
    S.19-22
  10. Qin, J.: Evolving paradigms of knowledge representation and organization : a comparative study of classification, XML/DTD and ontology (2003) 0.01 
    0.00664568 = product of:
  0.01329136 = sum of:
    0.01329136 = product of:
      0.02658272 = sum of:
        0.02658272 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02658272 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17176686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    12. 9.2004 17:22:35
  11. Wang, Z.; Chaudhry, A.S.; Khoo, C.S.G.: Using classification schemes and thesauri to build an organizational taxonomy for organizing content and aiding navigation (2008) 0.01 
    0.00664568 = product of:
  0.01329136 = sum of:
    0.01329136 = product of:
      0.02658272 = sum of:
        0.02658272 = weight(_text_:22 in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02658272 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17176686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    7.11.2008 15:22:04
  12. Olson, H.; Nielsen, J.; Dippie, S.R.: Encyclopaedist rivalry, classificatory commonality, illusory universality (2003) 0.01 
    0.005631488 = product of:
  0.011262976 = sum of:
    0.011262976 = product of:
      0.045051903 = sum of:
        0.045051903 = weight(_text_:authors in 2761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045051903 = score(doc=2761,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.20147301 = fieldWeight in 2761, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2761)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper describes the cultural construction of classification as exemplified by the French Encyclopòudists, Jean d'Alembert and Denis Diderot, and the encyclopaedism of Samuel Taylor Coleridge analysing original texts digitized and encoded using XML and an adaptation of TEI. 1. Introduction This paper, focusing an encyclopaedism, is part of a larger study exploring the cultural construction of classification. The larger study explores possible foundations for bias in the structure of classifications with a view to more equitable practice. Bias in classification has been documented relative to race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality and other factors. Analyses and proposed solutions have addressed only acute biases in particular systems, not the systems themselves. The project tentatively identifies the systemic roots of bias are culturally specific and reflected in the structure of conventional classifcatory practices. A wide range of western cultural texts from classic Greek philosophy to twentieth-century ethnography is being analysed. The consistency with which certain presumptions are revealed, no matter how different the philosophical and social views of the authors, indicates their ubiquity in western thought, though it is not mirrored in many other cultures. We hope that an understanding of these fundamental cultural presumptions will make space for development of alternative approaches to knowledge organization that can work alongside conventional methods. This paper describes an example of the first phase of the project, which is a deconstruction developed from relevant texts. In the context of encyclopaedism the key texts used in this paper are Jean d'Alembert's Preliminary Discourse to the Encyclopedie, selections from Denis Diderot's contributions to the Encyclopedie, and Samuel Taylor Coleridge's Treatise an Method and Prospectus of the Encyclopedia Metropolitana. We are analysing these texts in digital form using Extensible Markup Language (XML) implemented via a document type definition (DTD) created for the purpose including elements of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI). We will first explain the encoding methodology; then define the differences between the French Encyclopaedists and the English Coleridge; deconstruct these differences by allowing the commonalities between the texts to emerge; and, finally, examine their cultural specificity.
  13. Broughton, V.; Slavic, A.: Building a faceted classification for the humanities : principles and procedures (2007) 0.01 
    0.005631488 = product of:
  0.011262976 = sum of:
    0.011262976 = product of:
      0.045051903 = sum of:
        0.045051903 = weight(_text_:authors in 2875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045051903 = score(doc=2875,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.20147301 = fieldWeight in 2875, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2875)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper aims to provide an overview of principles and procedures involved in creating a faceted classification scheme for use in resource discovery in an online environment. Design/methodology/approach - Facet analysis provides an established rigorous methodology for the conceptual organization of a subject field, and the structuring of an associated classification or controlled vocabulary. This paper explains how that methodology was applied to the humanities in the FATKS project, where the objective was to explore the potential of facet analytical theory for creating a controlled vocabulary for the humanities, and to establish the requirements of a faceted classification appropriate to an online environment. A detailed faceted vocabulary was developed for two areas of the humanities within a broader facet framework for the whole of knowledge. Research issues included how to create a data model which made the faceted structure explicit and machine-readable and provided for its further development and use. Findings - In order to support easy facet combination in indexing, and facet searching and browsing on the interface, faceted classification requires a formalized data structure and an appropriate tool for its management. The conceptual framework of a faceted system proper can be applied satisfactorily to humanities, and fully integrated within a vocabulary management system. Research limitations/implications - The procedures described in this paper are concerned only with the structuring of the classification, and do not extend to indexing, retrieval and application issues. Practical implications - Many stakeholders in the domain of resource discovery consider developing their own classification system and supporting tools. The methods described in this paper may clarify the process of building a faceted classification and may provide some useful ideas with respect to the vocabulary maintenance tool. Originality/value - As far as the authors are aware there is no comparable research in this area.
  14. Facets: a fruitful notion in many domains : special issue on facet analysis (2008) 0.00 
    0.0035196801 = product of:
  0.0070393602 = sum of:
    0.0070393602 = product of:
      0.028157441 = sum of:
        0.028157441 = weight(_text_:authors in 3262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028157441 = score(doc=3262,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.12592064 = fieldWeight in 3262, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3262)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: KO 36(2009) no.1, S.62-63 (K. La Barre): "This special issue of Axiomathes presents an ambitious dual agenda. It attempts to highlight aspects of facet analysis (as used in LIS) that are shared by cognate approaches in philosophy, psychology, linguistics and computer science. Secondarily, the issue aims to attract others to the study and use of facet analysis. The authors represent a blend of lifetime involvement with facet analysis, such as Vickery, Broughton, Beghtol, and Dahlberg; those with well developed research agendas such as Tudhope, and Priss; and relative newcomers such as Gnoli, Cheti and Paradisi, and Slavic. Omissions are inescapable, but a more balanced issue would have resulted from inclusion of at least one researcher from the Indian school of facet theory. Another valuable addition might have been a reaction to the issue by one of the chief critics of facet analysis. Potentially useful, but absent, is a comprehensive bibliography of resources for those wishing to engage in further study, that now lie scattered throughout the issue. Several of the papers assume relative familiarity with facet analytical concepts and definitions, some of which are contested even within LIS. Gnoli's introduction (p. 127-130) traces the trajectory, extensions and new developments of this analytico- synthetic approach to subject access, while providing a laundry list of cognate approaches that are similar to facet analysis. This brief essay and the article by Priss (p. 243-255) directly addresses this first part of Gnoli's agenda. Priss provides detailed discussion of facet-like structures in computer science (p. 245- 246), and outlines the similarity between Formal Concept Analysis and facets. This comparison is equally fruitful for researchers in computer science and library and information science. By bridging into a discussion of visualization challenges for facet display, further research is also invited. Many of the remaining papers comprehensively detail the intellectual heritage of facet analysis (Beghtol; Broughton, p. 195-198; Dahlberg; Tudhope and Binding, p. 213-215; Vickery). Beghtol's (p. 131-144) examination of the origins of facet theory through the lens of the textbooks written by Ranganathan's mentor W.C.B. Sayers (1881-1960), Manual of Classification (1926, 1944, 1955) and a textbook written by Mills A Modern Outline of Classification (1964), serves to reveal the deep intellectual heritage of the changes in classification theory over time, as well as Ranganathan's own influence on and debt to Sayers.

Authors

Types

  • a 13
  • s 1

Themes